With SC's TRO, what happens now to traffic violators caught via NCAP?


The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) clarified on Wednesday, Aug. 31, that traffic violators caught via the no-contact apprehension policy (NCAP) before the Supreme Court's issuance of the temporary restraining order (TRO) will still have to settle the corresponding penalties.

MMDA Legal Service head and acting spokesperson Cris Saruca Jr. said only the penalties for those whose violations were caught by NCAP after the TRO was issued on Tuesday, Aug. 30, would be waived.

MMDA Legal Services and acting spokesperson Cris Saruca, Jr. (photo: MMDA)

“The Supreme Court said that the TRO is effective immediately and shall continue until further notice, hence, it is prospective, and those who have been caught through the policy prior to the issuance of the TRO still have to pay their fines,” Saruca explained.

"(Thus), the collection of NCAP fines shall also stop for those who have been apprehended by the policy after the issuance of TRO yesterday. Apprehension which happened prior to the TRO shall still be subject to corresponding penalties," he added.

More than 107,000 violators were caught through the NCAP since January to Aug. 24 this year.

Common violations include disregarding traffic signs, number coding scheme, and no loading and unloading.

Saruca said that NCAP has contributed to behavioral shift of motorists but said he is confident that even without the policy, discipline among motorists will be maintained to ensure smooth traffic flow and for the safety of all road users.

Meanwhile, Saruca also said that the MMDA will consult the Office of the Solicitor General to seek advice on its next action and whether it will have to intervene on the pending petition as it is not a respondent to the case.

The issuance of the TRO stemmed from the filing of at least four transport groups of the petition to declare NCAP as unconstitutional.

The groups sought for the issuance of TRO on NCAP implementation by at least five local government units in Metro Manila, and the Land Transportation Office.

They argued that the NCAP violates the right to due process since it is the registered owners of the vehicles who are tasked to pay the corresponding penalties.